RE:RE:RE:IPL Management ?The heartland project is a total failure to date because the management failed to do what thousands of other have done well for last 75 years. PPL management is also a fail because they believe there are long term buyers for over prices govt subsidized ( illegal in Europe) petchem products 10,000 km away from end users in a country with 100 year old transport infrastructure that loo s third world compared to Africa. Theres a reason heartland was not 100% private funded with a line of investors fighting for a stake LOL
Albatross wrote: Makes sense. Part of the theoretical efficiencies of mergers is LESS management relative to asset base.. ie. there's only room for 1 CEO. Same applies for many other positions.
Sometimes it backfires if the take-over company reduces too many positions or fires people with hard to replace knowledge. Another 'growing pain' to consider would be if the companies had very different corporate structures and systems. Lack of training, lack of policy review, lack of employee buy-in, contradictions in safety policies/procedures etc.. These all create friction points that can reduce overall efficiency and would be something a prudent company would be on the look out for, to mitigate against.
But yeah the thing to keep in mind is it's all relative. So if PPL does take over IPL for sure it will end up with larger management numbers (that's just what happens when a company grows). However, the combined company will have less corporate overhead relative to what there would be if the two companies were to remain separated ..